[mooninquirer]

These two things are very unrelated, but I accept NEITHER that HAARP controls the weather and Earthquakes, nor that contrails are poisonous chemtrails.

HAARP is going in the opposite direction ---- making the public feel that the government has this awe-inspiring God-like power to control the weather or Earthquakes. It is similar to nuke bombs. I would not be surprised if the CIA or the CFR ( Council on Foreign Relations ), David Rockefeller and the Rothschilds are financing people to espouse these theories about HAARP. And I resent it, because HAARP is getting so much attention, especially since the Earthquakes in Japan. And yet the nuke bomb hoax gets very little attention.

Chemtrails doesn't give the Jews that much power, but the problem I have with it, is HOW do the people ordering them to happen avoid getting poisoned themselves ? This is not like fluoride in water where those that know it is harmful can avoid it. Yet, there are MANY people with youtube channels about chemtrails. Certainly, the Jews in power would not hesitate to poison Gentiles, but I just do not see how they themselves avoid it.

I haven't tried it, but an interesting experiment would be to doubt HAARP and chemtrails, and see if you get a lot of very rude comments about how naive you are. The nuke bomb propagandists rely heavily upon INSULTS to discourage other people from considering very insightful comments that, for example, "Ivy Mike," relies upon ominous, scary music and looks very fake.

[rerevisionist]

I went out of curiosity to a meeting on chemtrails, hosted by an organisation that hosts 'soft' alternative stuff.

As far as I can see, it's partly based on chemical warfare by Americans in Vietnam - the photos of containers piping chemicals to the outside of planes seemed accurate; may have been crop spraying, though. The censorship of the issue MIGHT contribute to the conspiratorial atmosphere.

Another aspect is simply the fact that trails, attributed to hyrocarbon fuel burning and condensing to water vapour in cold and attenuated atmospheric conditions, do exist, and they persist for a long time. And because of their height, they may be lit by sunlight at dawn and dusk. And they may move in different directions from winds at surface level, which may puzzle people.

For some reason a standard list of chemicals is always given, including 'barium'. These people don't seem to know barium is a metallic element, like calcium, reactive enough not to exist on its own in sprayable form.

The final thing is the claim that people generally suffer from disease as a result of spraying - called 'magellonic disease' I think. The 'proof' was to give people red wine to drink; then a mouthwash of hydrogen peroxide; then spit into a cup. It's a curious parody of a scientific test: the red wine acts as a stain; the H2O2 loosens food fragments; so the resulting spit is likely to contain fizzy dark red bits.

[FirstClassSkeptic]

I think chemtrails exist because I see them. They don't look like normal condensation. And I can sometimes see two planes flying at about the same looking altitude and path, and one is leaving a long lasting trail, and the other is not.

As to what they are attempting to accomplish, I can't hazard a guess.

[rerevisionist]

Hmm @ FirstClass. It's another of these cases which are outside the normal range of experience, isn't it. For example, the air is attenuated - I'm pretty sure about that! - and I assume it's cold, judging by high mountains, but maybe 'temperature' in a normal sense doesn't exist, since there's nothing to intercept the sun's rays. It seems likely that hot exhaust would condense and maybe freeze into ice crystals, if below zero. Conceivably CO2 might freeze into dry ice; I seem to remember this is about minus 40, but this may be wrong. Whether (say) alcohol or jet fuel would freeze, I have little idea. If someone wanted to distribute chemicals, it would depend whether the stuff itself is to be spread, or something dissolved in it. For that matter, dry powder might be better - just empty out some sacks!

As to different trails from essentially the same plane, isn't it possible that one of them is climbing, accelerating, or otherwise in need of greater fuel consumption, and therefore makes more vapour?

[rerevisionist]

I took the liberty of trying to adding to your title. Hope that's OK. I selected this thread because of the fluoride reference.

On the general topic of destroying civilisation, it suddenly struck me that a favourite topic in the 19th century and early 20th century was why the Roman Empire fell.

Everyone agrees there's no single cause. However, cases have been made for --
[1] Poisoning by lead pipes (and lead acetate, which tastes sugary, in wine).
[2] Economic collapse by over-generous promises plus forcible tax collection, so that eventually large area of farmland were simply abandoned.
[3] Elite women not having children, so that distinguished families died out.
[4] Orgies, decadence, weird sex, hyperexpensive banquets
[5] Long, protracted, tiring wars.
[6] Progressively increasing use of foreign mercenaries.
[7] Immigration to Rome - "all roads lead to Rome" - so it became overburdened with immigrant mongrels.

Is it possible this formula is the root of the 'protocols' and other Jewish-backed subversive movements?

[1] Fluoride etc - too many people know by now lead is poisonous
[2] Promises to immigrants etc which cannot be sustainable
[3] Discouragement of white families
[4] Promotion of sexual deviancies and pornography
[5] Well - yes - long, protracted wars
[6] Well - yes - assorted 'allies' are used by the 'west' or at least by the Jews running them
[7] Mass immigration - well, yes.

[8] However, destruction of a currency by inflation seems to be missing; Lenin is quoted (I don't know if this is authentic) as saying "to destroy a country, destroy its currency" so this seems a more modern idea.
[9] Another missing thing is the idea of picking off countries one at a time. Obviously this didn't apply to Rome. But it's highly effective as it's possible to exploit other animosities or simple competition.

[FirstClassSkeptic]

I have a small book here on the fall of Rome. It adds three more things, that I recall, from reading it about two years ago:

Increasing centralization of government.
The people elected to office had no knowledge of the history of the founding of the Roman republic.
The Senate was really ran by the military, but the people didn't realize this.

The book said that Rome had no credit. They had to tax heavily.

The book mentions that Gibbons blamed the fall of Rome on Chrisianity. This book though said that Christianity was an escape. IT was more of a reaction to how bad things were. So people were seeking a reward in another life, since this life was so bad.

People left farms and work and turned to banditry. The Roman government decreeded that everyone must stay in the ocupation of their father.

People tried to escape to the forests and to the desert, so that too was outlawed.

Maybe I can find that book and quote some stuff directly out of it. It was written in about 1950, and i don't suppose the author realized how near it would describe the USA in sixty years.

[NUKELIES]

The book mentions that Gibbons blamed the fall of Rome on Chrisianity. This book though said that Christianity was an escape. IT was more of a reaction to how bad things were. So people were seeking a reward in another life, since this life was so bad.

People left farms and work and turned to banditry. The Roman government decreeded that everyone must stay in the ocupation of their father.

People tried to escape to the forests and to the desert, so that too was outlawed.

I believe there will develop a new Catholicism (read Universalism) for the Age of Aquarius. I hazard a guess that every age (two thousand year astrological cycle) has its particular Catholicism. Perhaps the religion of Ancient Egypt was a catholicism for the age of Taurus?

I discern more daily about the slavishness of the average person who decides to take rather than give, and submits to the order of others for handouts.

[rerevisionist]

Edward Gibbon, not Gibbons. 'The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' I'm sure must be downloadable free as of course it's out of copyright.

The economic interpretation of abandoned farms is something I remember from Herbert Spencer; the Victorians discovered economic history, possibly because they had statistical material and were inclined to project it backwards.

Gibbon didn't like Christianity - I'd forgotten he blamed its development for increasing lack of realism. However, it was imposed top-down which suggests it wasn't in itself that powerful a force. Imho it was imposed in an attempt to hold the various groups and tribes together - not unlike promotion of multiculti now and 'political correctness'.

Your small book on Rome might be 'The Myth of Rome's Fall' by R Mansfield (1958). I hunted this book down via Amazon, as I was intrigued by the title. Unfortunately it disappointed me; but there you go.

It struck me that the 'Protocols .. Zion' and the Frankfurt School stuff might have been influenced by these ideas - and of course the people who try to draw attention to these might themselves have inserted or been looking for such references.